Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor. February 25, 2009.
| Previous page |
Political Prisoners and Detainees
The CCDHRN stated that the government held at least 205 political prisoners and detainees at year's end, compared with 240 at the end of 2007. The convictions were for such offenses as disrespect of the head of state, disrespect and scorn of patriotic symbols, public disorder, and attempting to leave the country illegally. Other inmates were convicted of disseminating enemy propaganda, illicit association, clandestine printing, or the broad charge of rebellion, which sometimes has been brought against advocates of peaceful democratic change. For example, on February 2, police beat and detained human rights activist Mijail Capote Aranda for expressing antigovernment sentiments in the city of Manzanillo, Granma Province. A court sentenced him to three years in prison for "disrespect to the head of state" and "attack on police officers."
Authorities continued to use short-term detention at a greatly increased rate, instead of bringing charges for offenses that carry long prison terms. Dissidents frequently were threatened during the reporting period with prosecutions for "dangerousness," although few were actually charged and sentenced. The number of convictions for "dangerousness" still remained high during the reporting period, but most of those convicted were not politically affiliated.
At year's end 55 of the 75 peaceful activists, journalists, union organizers, and opposition figures arrested and convicted in 2003, mostly on charges of violating national security and aiding a foreign power, remained in prison. On February 18, President Raul Castro released into exile four of the original 75 to Spanish authorities for humanitarian reasons.
Mistreatment of political prisoners and detainees was widespread. Beatings were not uncommon. On May 20, guards at the Guantanamo Provincial Prison attacked Jose Daniel Ferrer Garcia as he attempted to telephone human rights activist Juan Carlos Gonzalez Leiva.
Many political inmates were denied privileges given to ordinary prisoners, such as access to an exercise yard or sunshine. The government continued to deny human rights organizations and the International Committee of the Red Cross access to political prisoners and detainees. Authorities denied visits to families of political prisoners and detainees. Prisoners in punishment cells had no access to lawyers.
Civil Judicial Procedures and Remedies
There is a judiciary for civil matters; however, these courts are utilized almost exclusively for family issues, such as divorce and child custody. Most torts provisions typically associated with civil courts are remedied in criminal court. The only way a citizen can seek redress for a human rights violation is to convince a prosecutor to file a criminal charge. The CCDHRN was not aware of any successful human rights-related prosecution during the year or of any damages ordered by any court in connection with a human rights case. In cases of police brutality or cases involving a member of the military, charges must be presented before a military tribunal. The CCDHRN stated that CP and government control of the prosecutors' offices and the court discouraged citizens from seeking legal redress.
f. Arbitrary Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence
While the constitution provides for the inviolability of a citizen's home and correspondence, official surveillance of private and family affairs by government-controlled organizations, such as the CDRs, remained pervasive. The government employed physical and electronic surveillance against nonviolent political opponents and interfered in the lives of citizens. The authorities employed a wide range of social controls to discover and discourage nonconformity.
State Security routinely read correspondence coming from abroad. Most letters from overseas were delivered with the envelope obviously torn and resealed; many were placed in a different envelope. State Security monitored domestic and overseas telephone calls, correspondence, and conversations with foreigners. During the year a defector publicly stated that the government has permanent taps on thousands of telephone lines and alleged that the government monitored the telephone lines of foreign diplomats, foreign press, foreign businessmen, and local dissidents.
State Security agents subjected journalists and foreign diplomats to harassment and surveillance, including electronic surveillance and surreptitious entry into their homes. Authorities also applied psychological pressure to former prisoners, one of whom reported that the government painted "Viva la Revolucion" on his living room wall and was told that he would be arrested if he painted over it.
Civil society organizations reported intensified government monitoring of dissidents. On August 25, three prominent dissidents, Martha Beatriz Roque, Vladimiro Roca, and Jorge Luis Perez Garcia (Antunez), filed a formal complaint before the attorney general, charging that their e-mails, telephone calls, personal videos, photographs, and other documents had been made public in both the written press and on television without their consent and in violation of the country's privacy laws. After 60 days elapsed, the three dissidents filed another complaint that the responsible official had broken the law by failing to respond within the time frame mandated by law. A judge determined that the case should be reviewed because of the severity of the accusation and sent the second complaint to the same office for action. By year's end no official action had been taken.
There were numerous credible reports of forced evictions of squatters and residents who lacked official permission to reside in Havana and other major cities. An official government publication, Juventud Rebelde, stated on August 3 that since 2006 authorities had evicted more than 20,000 persons living in the vicinity of Havana in improvised squatter villages and sent them back to their home provinces.
The Ministry of Interior employed a system of informants and CDR block committees to monitor and control public opinion. Several sources stated that in September, surveillance increased after hurricanes Gustav and Ike and State Security agents were positioned around farmers' markets to eavesdrop on any implied criticisms of the government respecting food shortages. It was widely believed that State Security would attempt to identify such critics for possible future punishment. CDRs continued to report on suspicious activity, including conspicuous consumption; unauthorized meetings, including those with foreigners; and what it considered defiant attitudes toward the government and the revolution.
Section 2 Respect for Civil Liberties, Including:
a. Freedom of Speech and Press
The constitution provides for freedom of speech and of the press insofar as they "conform to the aims of socialist society," a clause effectively barring free speech, and in practice the government did not allow criticism of the revolution or its leaders. Laws against antigovernment propaganda, graffiti, and disrespect of officials impose penalties of between three months and one year in prison; criticism of the president or members of the ANPP or Council of State is punishable by three years in prison. Disseminating "enemy propaganda," which includes expressing opinions at odds with those of the government, is punishable by up to 14 years' imprisonment. The government considered international reports of human rights violations and mainstream foreign newspapers and magazines to be enemy propaganda. Local CDRs inhibited freedom of speech by monitoring and reporting dissent or criticism.
Catholic priests and other clergy were able to deliver sermons without prior government approval. Catholic Church officials were allowed to broadcast 15-minute radio programs on special occasions such as Christmas, as long as they did not have any political content.
The government considered print and electronic media to be state property. The government owned and the CP controlled all media except for a number of underground newsletters. The government operated four national television stations, six national radio stations, one international radio station, one national magazine, and three national newspapers. Additionally, it operated many local radio stations, television stations, magazines, and newspapers. All were official CP organs. Content was nearly uniform across all of these media; none enjoyed editorial independence. The regime vigorously prosecuted attempts to distribute unauthorized written, filmed, or photographed material. The law bars "clandestine printing." The government was the sole book publisher in the country, and with the exception of some Catholic Church publications, state censors required prepublication approval.
The government subjected independent journalists to travel bans, detentions, harassment of family and friends, equipment seizures, imprisonment, and threats of imprisonment. State Security agents posed as independent journalists to gather information on activists and spread misinformation and mistrust within independent journalist circles. At least 25 journalists were in prison during the year.
The law prohibits distribution of printed material from foreign sources. Citizens did not have the right to receive or possess publications from abroad, although newsstands at some hotels for foreigners and certain hard-currency stores sold limited numbers of foreign newspapers and magazines. In March demonstrators distributing copies of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights were attacked by a government-orchestrated mob and later detained. The government continued to jam the transmissions of Radio Marti and Television Marti.
The government frequently barred independent libraries from receiving materials from abroad and seized materials donated by foreign diplomats.
Internet Freedom
The government controlled nearly all Internet access. Authorities reviewed and censored e-mail. Authorities employed Internet search filters and also blocked access to Web sites they considered objectionable. Citizens could access the Internet only through government-approved institutions, except at Internet facilities provided by a few diplomatic offices. Despite the government's March 21 decision to permit citizens to purchase personal computers, access to the Internet was strictly controlled and given only to those deemed ideologically trustworthy. The only citizens granted direct Internet access were some government officials and certain government-approved doctors, professors, and journalists. The government restricted Internet use in government offices, confining most officials to Web pages related to their work. In March and April authorities tightened Internet restrictions to block citizens' access to certain independent Web sites. Both foreigners and citizens were allowed to buy Internet access cards from the national telecommunications provider and to use hotel business centers, where Internet access can be purchased only in convertible pesos. Access usually costs between 128 and 288 convertible pesos ($5.76 to $12.51) an hour, a rate beyond the means of most citizens. The government stated that less than 12 percent of the population used Internet services in 2007, a figure that included citizens who had access to the government intranet only at work.
The law requires all public Internet centers to register with the government and permits the Ministry for Information Technology and Communications to control and supervise all such centers without prior warning.
While the law does not provide for any specific punishments for Internet use, it is illegal to own a satellite dish that would provide uncensored Internet access. In December the government instructed providers of public Internet access to block access to sites "whose contents are contrary to social and moral interests and community standards" or that "affect the integrity or the security of the State." The same decree ordered Internet providers to prevent the use of encryption software and the transfer of material to encrypted files.
On December 3, State Security agents warned blogger Yoani Sanchez against holding a planned conference of Cuban bloggers; despite hosting the conference, Sanchez had not suffered any consequences by year's end.
Academic Freedom and Cultural Events
The government restricted academic freedom and continued to emphasize the importance of reinforcing revolutionary ideology and discipline. Students are required to swear to follow the principles of the CP and to model their lives after Ernesto "Che" Guevara. Academics were prohibited from meeting with some diplomats without prior government approval, and those permitted to travel abroad were aware that their actions, if deemed politically unfavorable, could negatively impact their relatives back home.
Dismissals of teachers and professors for political reasons occurred during the year. For example, on June 30, public school authorities dismissed physical education teacher Raul Velazquez Valdes for talking disrespectfully "about the institutions of the republic and the heroes and martyrs of the country." However, independent academic Roberto de Miranda stated that the number of such dismissals during the reporting period was significantly lower than in previous years.
Expulsions of university students for political reasons also declined during the year, but did occur. In March Nestor Perez Gonzalez was expelled from the law school of the University of Pinar del Rio for coauthoring an article on the transition to democracy in Spain for the online periodical Convivencia.
Government-controlled public libraries required a government letter of permission for access to books or information.
University admission was normally contingent upon whether a student participated in government-encouraged secondary school activities.
b. Freedom of Peaceful Assembly and Association
Although the constitution grants limited rights of assembly and association, these rights are subject to the requirement that they may not be "exercised against the existence and objectives of the Socialist State."
Freedom of Assembly
The law punishes any unauthorized assembly of more than three persons, including those for private religious services in private homes, by up to three months in prison and a fine. Civil society organizations reported intensified suppression of the right to assemble. The authorities have never approved a public meeting by a human rights group and detained activists for short periods at an increased rate compared with previous years to prevent activists from attending meetings, demonstrations, or ceremonies. The CCDHRN reported that temporary detentions increased from 325 in 2007 to more than 1,500 during the year. The detentions appeared to coincide with planned meetings and demonstrations, including events at foreign diplomatic establishments.
Freedom of Association
The law specifically prohibits unrecognized groups, and the government denied citizens freedom of association. Authorities have never approved the existence of a human rights group; however, a number of professional associations operated as nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) without legal recognition. The constitution proscribes any political organization other than the CP.
Recognized churches, the Roman Catholic humanitarian organization Caritas, the Freemason movement, and a number of fraternal or professional organizations were the only associations permitted to function outside the formal structure, but not the influence, of the state, the CP, and their mass organizations. The authorities continued to ignore applications from new groups for legal recognition, including several new religious groups as well as homosexual-rights organizations, thereby subjecting members to potential charges of illegal association.
c. Freedom of Religion
Although the constitution recognizes the right of citizens to practice any religious belief within the framework of respect for the law, the government continued to restrict freedom of religion. The government required churches and other religious groups to enroll with the provincial registry of associations within the Ministry of Justice to obtain official recognition.
Although it did not favor any particular religion or church, the government appeared most tolerant of churches that maintained close relations to the state through the Cuban Council of Churches (CCC). The CCC includes 25 religious organizations as full members, nine associate members, and three with observer status. It does not include the Cuban Catholic Church. In January three Protestant ministers and a babalow (Santeria priest) were elected to the National Assembly.
There were numerous reports of official discrimination against Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses in employment and education. The discrimination was due to these groups' refusal to work or participate in mandatory school activities on Saturdays, and for Jehovah's Witnesses' refusal to comply with compulsory military training.
The government rarely permitted the construction of new churches; however, it increasingly permitted the restoration and expansion of existing churches.
A government directive requires house-church operators to register their house churches with the government. To register, an operator must meet a number of requirements, such as limiting weekly meetings to a number specified by the local official. The vast majority of house churches were unregistered and thus technically illegal.
Education was secular, and no religious educational institutions were allowed. However, the Catholic Church, Protestant churches, and Jewish synagogues were permitted to offer religious education classes to their members and adult education classes to the general public.
Religious literature and materials may be imported only through a registered religious group and distributed only to officially recognized religious groups.
The government permitted each Catholic diocese to request broadcast time for a 15-minute broadcast on Christmas, Easter, and the feast day of the Virgin of Charity, the country's patron saint.
Religious groups were required to submit a request to local CP officials before holding processions or events outside of religious buildings.
Societal Abuses and Discrimination
There were no reports of societal violence, harassment, or discrimination against members of religious groups. There were between 1,000 and 1,500 members of the Jewish community. There were no reports of anti-Semitic acts.
For a more detailed discussion, see the 2008 International Religious Freedom Report at www.state.gov/g/drl/irf/rpt.
d. Freedom of Movement, Internally Displaced Persons, Protection of Refugees, and Stateless Persons
The law qualifies freedom of movement within the country, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and in practice the government severely restricted these rights. The government tightly restricted foreign and domestic travel by dissidents and limited internal migration from rural areas to Havana. Authorities frequently picked up dissidents visiting Havana and promptly escorted them back to their home provinces.
Although the constitution allows all citizens to travel anywhere within the country, residence is heavily restricted, thus impeding free movement. The local housing commission and provincial government authorities considered requests for change of residence largely on the basis of housing space. During the wait for permission, which routinely lasted six months or more, the applicant could not obtain food rations or a local identification card in the new location. Anyone living in a location illegally may be fined and sent home. While the regulation was in effect nationwide, it was applied most frequently in Havana. Human rights organizations asserted that the expulsion from Havana of young persons and individuals from the eastern provinces increased to more than 100 persons a week. Police threatened to prosecute for "dangerousness" anyone who returned to Havana after having been expelled.
The government restricted both emigration and temporary foreign travel, mainly by requiring an exit permit. Although the government allowed the majority of persons who qualified for immigrant or refugee status in other countries to depart, at least 247 citizens or their dependents who had received foreign travel documents were denied exit permits during the year. This figure represented only persons who reported their difficulties to a foreign diplomatic establishment. Persons routinely denied exit permits included medical personnel, men of military age, dissidents, and citizens with certain political or religious beliefs. An unpublished government policy denies exit permits to medical professionals until they have performed, on average, six to eight years of service in their profession after requesting permission to travel abroad; nurses and medical technicians waited an average of two to three years to receive exit permission.
The government denied exit permits for several years to relatives of individuals who migrated illegally (for example, merchant seamen and sports figures who defected while out of the country). The government frequently withheld exit visas to control dissidents. Dissident physician Hilda Molina continued to wait for exit permission, as she had for 15 years, although her elderly mother was allowed to join relatives in Argentina in June.
The government denied exit permission to human rights activists who held valid foreign travel documents. In April authorities refused permission to blogger Yoani Sanchez to travel to Spain to receive a prestigious prize for journalism. Noted dissidents Francisco Chaviano and Jorge Luis Perez Garcia (Antunez) were both refused permission to travel abroad for treatment of serious medical conditions that developed during their long prison terms.
The government used both internal and external exile. The law permits authorities to bar an individual from a certain area, or to restrict an individual to a certain area, for a period of one to 10 years. Under this provision, authorities may exile any person whose presence in a given location is considered "socially dangerous." The authorities routinely warned emigrating dissidents and their family members that speaking out against the government abroad could result in repercussions for relatives remaining in Cuba, such as loss of employment or denial of permission to leave the country.
Those seeking to emigrate legally alleged they also faced fines, reprisals, harassment, and intimidation by the government; involuntary job transfers; threatened arrest; and dismissal from employment.
Fees for medical exams, exit permissions, passport costs, and airport taxes are payable only in convertible pesos, and amounted to approximately 630 convertible pesos ($680.40) for an adult, or nearly three years' salary. These fees represented a significant hardship, particularly for migrants who had been fired from their jobs for being "politically unreliable" and had no income. At year's end some would-be migrants were unable to leave the country because of inability to pay exit fees. Authorities routinely dispossessed migrants and their families of their homes and most of their belongings before permitting them to leave the country. The government also demanded payment of hefty fines for past attempts to leave the country illegally.
The law provides for imprisonment of up to three years or a fine of 300 to 1,000 pesos ($11 to $38) for unauthorized departures by boat or raft. The government also sometimes applied a law on trafficking in persons to would-be migrants. The law provides for imprisonment from two to five years for those who organize, promote, or incite illegal exit from national territory. The CCDHRN estimated that at year's end approximately 300 citizens were serving sentences or awaiting trial on this charge, which ordinarily carries a term of 15 to 20 years' imprisonment. Under the terms of the 1994 U.S.-Cuba Migration Accord, the government agreed not to prosecute or retaliate against migrants returned from international or U.S. waters, or from the U.S. Naval Station at Guantanamo, after attempting to emigrate illegally if they had not committed a separate criminal offense. However, in practice many would-be migrants experienced harassment and discrimination such as fines, expulsion from school, job loss, and detention in prison.
The government generally refused to accept nationals returned from U.S. territory beyond the maritime limits of the Migration Accord. On December 4, under a new migration accord with Mexico, the country accepted the repatriation of 41 Cubans from Mexico.
| Previous page |
